Re: A CodingStyle suggestion

[Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>]

Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 11:56:16PM +0100, Richard Knutsson wrote:
>   
> > Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
> >     
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > In CodingStyle Chapter 16 "Function return value and names", why not
> > > adding a comment about the favorable community way of checking the return
> > > value. ie:
> > >
> > > ret = do_method();
> > > if (ret) {
> > >   /* deal with error */
> > > }
> > >
> > > and not other ways like:
> > >
> > > if (do_method()) or 
> > >       
> > So:
> >
> > if (is_true()) {
> > 	/* do something */
> > }
> >
> > is alright then? If so, I agree, but please make it real clear in the 
> > document ;)
> >     
>
> Good catch :). A small grep of `access_ok' reveals that it's always used in the 
> form of:
> if (!access_ok()) { .. }
>
> I can conclude that verbal/imperative methods like `kmalloc, add_work' be 
> checked as:
> ret = do_work();
> if (ret) { ... }
> and predicate methods like `acess_ok, pci_dev_present' be checked like:
> if (!access_ok) { ... }
> if (pci_dev_present) { ...}
>
> Any comments ?
>   
Not really, I agree on this :)

Richard Knutsson

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/